Skip to main content

About your Search

20121222
20121230
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
of the government under president clinton and speaker gingrich. we have hisexperience, also the experience as a member of the budget commission put together by president clinton which came to nothing. just as the simpson bowles commission came to nothing. and as this fiscal clef being managed by his president does t look promising. >> that is really the point you brought up earlier. when you have european levels of spending which we now have come up you have traditional american tax rates, that cannot give. americans have a certain self-image. canada, americans think of canada as a semi french socialist market. total governmenent spending in canada is about 42% of gdp. is now 41% in the united states commits of the difference between the sturdy, manley republic of limited government and self-reliance citizens and the semi french monarchy is actually just down to 1%. we actually spend, government spends more per citizen on the average american than the french government does in the average frenchman. lou: i think you're being unfair to americans. we think of quebec, but certainly not all o
. >> you know, thing is something to that culturally. the irony to that of course is newt gingrich initiated this revolution in which he changed the culture to be very deferential to the leader. all of the sudden the house leadership was controlling who was the committee. he took the power out of the committee chairs and centralized it in the speakers -- in the minority leader's offices and the speaker's offices. and all of that really did change the way the entire house worked to make it more like the nancy pelosi house that we saw in the congress before it was taken over by boehner. >> salute and you do what you're told. >> party line votes. if you need to deliver the votes, you can. now it's coming apart there is no road map or diagram or architect in place for what the next iteration of what the house culture looks like from a parliamentary perspective. >> there is no -- one of the things that i think is most important about that is that there is no credibility that can be held by any member of the house that would give them sway over other members of the house on the republic
, there was huckabee, james dobson, newt gingrich came out and made similar comments, and you know, this is not a new phenomenon. after the horrible shooting in wisconsin, we had pat robertson come out and say that the shooter was probably someone who was angry at god, who hated religion, and that people of -- >> there's no evidence of that. >> -- needed to come together against these evil atheist forces, essentially. it was really wonderful there was this inter-faith service after the shooting but i think it was a missed opportunity for there to also be a nonreligious or atheist perspective represented there, because when something like this happens, people are looking for someone to blame, they're looking for, you know, a group of people to outgroup or to demonize and it surprises me how often it's atheists. i guess if you look at any number of studies that show that atheists are a widely mistrusted or, you know, disliked group in the united states, it's not surprising then that atheists get blamed. but i think when groups come together to show, you know, to build a coalition and show solidarity af
between presidents and speakers, even bill clinton and newt gingrich. they were coming together on a regular basis. they had a personal relationship. if ronald reagan had the upper hand saying mr. speaker i need you on this, what do i need to do for you to get a win? let's start there. obama says i don't have to negotiate with anybody. i won. that sp not the way to get a deal done. >> i seem to remember president george w. bush saying i have political capital and i intend to use it. >> bottom line is for two years i was a floor director for the house whip and my job was to get votes to pass legislation. i remember when speaker pelosi had the bill to fund the iraq war. our democratic caucus wasn't in support of that. nonetheless she put a bill on the floor where we had to fund the iraq floor. she did it because it was in the best interest of the american people. at the end of the day speaker boehner who is the speaker of the whole house has to do what is in the best interest and let the will of the house take its call. he has to move forward on this. you can't put the blame on th
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)